Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion
johnw wrote on 20.10.2014 05:21: On Oct 20, 2014, at 11:22 AM, Jack Burke burke...@gmail.com wrote: However, on the wiki page for the service tag http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service it only mentions its use for highways, railways and waterways. There are several other uses of the service key, like on waterway=canal + service=irrigation. No new information. This usage was in Jacks post already. So there must be other tags where the documentation exists for the other uses of the service tag only with the parent key. -- regards Holger ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion
2014-10-20 4:22 GMT+02:00 Jack Burke burke...@gmail.com: Is service a valid tag to use with shop=car_repair, and the wiki page for service is deficient? Or is the wiki page for shop=car_repair in error? Maybe using the service namespace to create more specific tags would be more inline with the current tagging scheme, like it is done for bicycle repair (etc.) service: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=service%3Abicycle i.e. service:car:*=* (or service:motorcar ?) FWIW, I do not recall the naked service subtag being proposed or discussed for car repair businesses. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (brickkiln)
2014-10-19 7:10 GMT+02:00 Megha Shrestha meghashrest...@gmail.com: Thank you for the suggestion. These are the details that are already available to us and I think they can be huge help if made open which is the reason for me to suggest this tag. I have gone through your suggestions and will make the required edits. Use of existing tag can be a help. I will add the additional information you said will be relevant to the proposal page. There is no such community that keeps these data updated but we are the representatives of OSM in Nepal and we are trying to get data updated regularly in OSM and this is also a part of our project. As you are probably going to import data into OSM you should be aware that there are guidelines which you are required to follow, which contain besides other things the requirement of writing to the import mailing list and documenting everything in the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Water tap
2014-10-18 23:20 GMT+02:00 Konstantin Karapetyan kotya.li...@gmail.com: I have already corrected the proposal from man_made to amenity following the suggestion at https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/27869/how-to-tag-water-taps-not-intended-for-drinking-water. So this is fixed. IMHO this doesn't fix it, because it now becomes incompatible to be tagged on a node with amenity=drinking_water. If the value shall remain a generic water_tap I'd stick to man_made to keep these compatible (see also man_made=water_well for instance, which is a similar feature somehow). Please note that amenity=drinking_water is highly introduced and used by many data consumers. This is an established tag that is used for almost seven years now. As for the clash with amenity=drinking_water: I see it, but I think there is an advantage of having yet another tag: - amenity=drinking_water can be used as an attribute where the presence thereof is non-obvious. E.g., for amenity=toilets. A water_tap is a separate object, and a combination amenity=water_tap + drinkable=yes would provide for a more specific mapping, where appropriate. you can't use amenity=* as an attribute to something different with a tag amenity=* You could use drinkable=yes as an attribute, but this will be strange on toilets and is redundant on drinking_water. - The combination drinking_water + drinkable=no is indeed quite confusing and has already caused a few discussions ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/water_tap#Rationale). water_tap would help clarify. yes, it is not only confusing, I'd call it wrong. It shouts out for problems. Its similar to amenity=toilets with access=private (but worse, in short, it is contradictive). - amenity=drinking_water is not always a tap, it can be a fountain, a well, a tap in a WC again; it can be used quite generally, without additional thinking. most cases I am aware of are indeed taps, because fountains are in the amenity namespace as well and will likely be tagged as such with drinkable=yes, a well would be man_made=water_well and could have amenity=drinking_water as combination (but there would be no need to clarify, it would already be clear that it is a well). In some cases, there may exist uncertainty as to how to tag a feature, but it's certain that potable water is available there. This tag fits well in such situations. water_tap provides similar clarity when the object is clearly there but the mapper doesn't know the type of water. for my main usecase it will not be clear if water_tap applies. I am talking about structures like these: http://www.romainrima.it/online/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/nasone.jpg that's basically a water_tap in a cast iron enclosure. Typically you'd need a special key to get access to the valve, but sometimes they are open. Some do not provide constant flow but require you to operated a turning valve or a push button. Also fountains typically do have some closing measures, typically not publicly accessible. It may be difficult to imagine the abundance of such situations for the West Europeans and Americans; but I come from Russia, where this situation is very typical. I've met it in other developing countries as well. Especially in the warm countries it is important not to confuse a source of water with potable water. Quite a few people I know from developed countries have suffered badly because they didn't realise there was a difference. I do agree here. You could add drinkable=unknown. My suggestion would be a generic tag for a water source that is either unknown to be drinkable to known not to be drinkable. (e.g. raw_water_tap or similar), could be combined with drinkable=unknown. - Map software often simply shows an icon without giving access to additional attributes. In that case a user may have no chance of seeing drinkable=no for drinking_water. The symbol for drinking_water — http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddrinking_water#Rendering — is very clear, and the contradiction may lead to quite unfortunate situations. yes, we should generally agree on not using A=B and C=D where those are not compatible. Subtagging is to used to refine something, not to change the meaning of other tags. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion
I see from the page history that I added service=* to the wiki page, but I'm sorry to say I cannot remember exactly why. :( While service=* is definitely in use with car repair shops, it does seem to create the possibility of confusion. I'd be happy to at least change the wording to indicate this, or remove it if that's the consensus. EDIT: looking into this further, service=tyres|dealer|parts|repair, which are the largest usage of the car repair-service tags (500-1800 uses, depending), all have wiki redirects to the Russian shop=car page ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU%3ATag%3Ashop%3Dcar). In looking at the service=tyres map on taginfo, the majority of usage is in Russia too http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/service=tyres#map Does anyone know someone who could bring this up on the Russian talk list? (or can read the Russian wiki page?) As for alternatives, some people have used car_repair=* but Martin's idea, though complex, would better allow multiple values. Cheers, Brad On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:59 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-20 4:22 GMT+02:00 Jack Burke burke...@gmail.com: Is service a valid tag to use with shop=car_repair, and the wiki page for service is deficient? Or is the wiki page for shop=car_repair in error? Maybe using the service namespace to create more specific tags would be more inline with the current tagging scheme, like it is done for bicycle repair (etc.) service: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=service%3Abicycle i.e. service:car:*=* (or service:motorcar ?) FWIW, I do not recall the naked service subtag being proposed or discussed for car repair businesses. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] [openstreetmap-carto] Drop rendering for landuse=field (#1074)
2014-10-20 13:50 GMT+02:00 Rovastar notificati...@github.com: Sorry for derailing this I know it should be on tagging. +1, I copied tagging so we can continue ;-) Landcover is from what I can see a pet project of yours and with minimum adoption. it is true that I have started using landcover and am advocating this (for good reason I believe, because landuse is generally a tag about _use_ . It is not a fictious word, but one with clear meaning, established in cartography, urbanism, architecture etc. and deviating from the meaning is not helping anybody. My aim is indeed to make mapping simpler and keep inherent logics). And I recall precisely how landuse=grass was born in 2008 on the German ML (there were already people foreseeing what now apparently has happened, asking to use a less generic value). Landcover=grass doesn't even have a wiki page. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landcover And some taginfo usage stats on it landuse=grass 2012-Dec = 1,112 2013-July = 2,413 2014-October (Now) = 3,190 So infact slowing in usage. It is a fringe tag at best and not in popular use despite a one man crusade to champion this. honestly, I have mapped maybe 10 landcover=grass in all those years. While I am pushing landcover=trees putting it on all tree covered areas that I map (also because it really hurts to put landuse=forest on every small patch of trees), I don't use the other landcover values a lot, so to me it seems that there are indeed other mappers who have adopted this (despite the sparse documentation you mentioned, there is only a proposal page). You can see this also in this map: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/landcover#map ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
2014-10-18 15:42 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: Can you please stop trying to come up with exceptions for the sport= tag? would you mind rephrasing this? I don't understand what you want to tell us, and I guess others feel similar, given that nobody has replied in the past 2 days... cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] cleanup of the key natural
2014-10-17 19:25 GMT+02:00 Friedrich Volkmann b...@volki.at: A cave is a hollow mould, thus a landform (or a georelief element, or whatever). I own several books on geomorphology, and each of them has a chapter on caves. If we did what you propose it would still be arbitrarily divided as there would be landforms in vegetation related and landforms in water related. Well, you may consider a bay a landform, but without doubt it's water-related in the first place. I propose to put beach in landforms and cave in water-related. Also coastline could go into landforms. And moor into landforms. And mud in water-related. What about putting fell into landforms? ... When you do a classification, you put every element where it fits best. It's just to get some structure in a long list. yes, that's the point. Our classification system is tags, and this is about the natural class. Putting the values of natural into arbitrary subclasses doesn't help anybody. IMHO. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] cleanup of the key natural
On 20.10.2014 17:45, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I propose to put beach in landforms and cave in water-related. Also coastline could go into landforms. And moor into landforms. And mud in water-related. What about putting fell into landforms? ... Most known caves are dry. I know because I have been in thousands of them. As I already told you, I am unsure what's the correct generic term for full forms, hollow moulds and flat forms. If you don't like landform, you are invited to come up with an alternative. But please don't take wikipedia as your one and only reference. Our classification system is tags, and this is about the natural class. Putting the values of natural into arbitrary subclasses doesn't help anybody. IMHO. Well, that may be your opinion, but when you look at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_features you'll find that quite a lot of keys have subclasses defined, particularly when the keys have a large number of values. I already mentioned shop=* as an example. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
would you mind rephrasing this? I don't understand what you want to tell us, and I guess others feel similar, given that nobody has replied in the past 2 days... Using sport=scuba_diving for a dive spot. That would be like using sport=soccer for a soccer field without using leisure=pitch. And it's not the only case. __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:AndiG88 ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
2014-10-20 19:16 GMT+02:00 Andreas Goss andi...@t-online.de: would you mind rephrasing this? I don't understand what you want to tell us, and I guess others feel similar, given that nobody has replied in the past 2 days... Using sport=scuba_diving for a dive spot. That would be like using sport=soccer for a soccer field without using leisure=pitch. And it's not the only case. sport=scuba_diving only makes sense with shop=sports (and maybe leisure=swimming_pool for specialized swimming pools to learn diving). I mean, all waters can be used for scuba diving. What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to scuba divers. Maybe we should make a tag like leisure=scuba_diving_attraction. Janko ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
Am 20.10.2014 20:37, schrieb Janko Mihelić: What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to scuba divers. Maybe we should make a tag like leisure=scuba_diving_attraction. . I beg to differ, there is a fairly wide range of restrictions at least on inland bodies of water in the world, including dedicated (allowed) entry points and so on. I suspect depending on the protection status the same goes for salt water too. The question is really if we should only map such entry points etc that are marked or if we go further than that. Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to scuba divers. Maybe we should make a tag like leisure=scuba_diving_attraction. I haven't followed this thread but Janko's comment reminded me that of dive sites that I'm aware of. We have numerous dive sites in Washington State, in the US. Edmonds Marine Park[1] is one of the most popular with about 25K divers visiting each year. It's not tagged in OSM but probably should be. Other park facilities are used by divers as one of their many recreational offerings, such as boating, fishing, etc. I like the leisure=scuba_diving_attraction, especially for sites that offer underwater attractions for divers. I'm not sure it fits well with sites that allow diving, but no particular attractions. For example, the US National Parks Service indicates on their maps sites that offer diving. In those cases it might scuba=yes Clifford 1. http://www.edmondswa.gov/services/education/discovery-programs/edmonds-underwater-park.html -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
Leisure=scuba_diving would be ok to me. Let the divers refine the particular attraction according to their practice. Le 20 octobre 2014 22:19:14 CEST, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us a écrit : On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to scuba divers. Maybe we should make a tag like leisure=scuba_diving_attraction. I haven't followed this thread but Janko's comment reminded me that of dive sites that I'm aware of. We have numerous dive sites in Washington State, in the US. Edmonds Marine Park[1] is one of the most popular with about 25K divers visiting each year. It's not tagged in OSM but probably should be. Other park facilities are used by divers as one of their many recreational offerings, such as boating, fishing, etc. I like the leisure=scuba_diving_attraction, especially for sites that offer underwater attractions for divers. I'm not sure it fits well with sites that allow diving, but no particular attractions. For example, the US National Parks Service indicates on their maps sites that offer diving. In those cases it might scuba=yes Clifford 1. http://www.edmondswa.gov/services/education/discovery-programs/edmonds-underwater-park.html -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Yves From my phone___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=mall versus shop=shopping_centre
Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=mall (26 643 instances) and shop=shopping_centre (182 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=shopping_centre in favour of shop=mall? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=stationery (8038 instances) and shop=office_supplies (177 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=office_supplies in favour of shop=stationery? For example, Staples, a large multinational stationery/office supplies shop is tagged 380 times as shop=stationery and 48 times as shop=office_supplies. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] sport= non-physical tags and the exceptions people come up with...
+1 for leisure=scuba_diving_attraction or better yet, leisure=divespot and define the attraction or divespot further with subkeys On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Yves yve...@gmail.com wrote: Leisure=scuba_diving would be ok to me. Let the divers refine the particular attraction according to their practice. Le 20 octobre 2014 22:19:14 CEST, Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us a écrit : On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Janko Mihelić jan...@gmail.com wrote: What people probably want to tag are waters that are interesting to scuba divers. Maybe we should make a tag like leisure=scuba_diving_attraction. I haven't followed this thread but Janko's comment reminded me that of dive sites that I'm aware of. We have numerous dive sites in Washington State, in the US. Edmonds Marine Park[1] is one of the most popular with about 25K divers visiting each year. It's not tagged in OSM but probably should be. Other park facilities are used by divers as one of their many recreational offerings, such as boating, fishing, etc. I like the leisure=scuba_diving_attraction, especially for sites that offer underwater attractions for divers. I'm not sure it fits well with sites that allow diving, but no particular attractions. For example, the US National Parks Service indicates on their maps sites that offer diving. In those cases it might scuba=yes Clifford 1. http://www.edmondswa.gov/services/education/discovery-programs/edmonds-underwater-park.html -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch -- Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Yves From my phone ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
I don't think there's much difference in reality as both sell paper, pens, ink and etc. However, the newer office supply places like Staples and Office Max are superstores that sell desks, computers, and other office furniture as well. When I think of stationary shops I think of smaller, more intimate spaces. I don't think my observation will help to decide which to use but might explain where the differences arose. Why some people would tag a Staples as a stationary shop and others as an office_supply shop is beyond me. It's just the way things happen on OSM I reckon. Cheers, Dave On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=stationery (8038 instances) and shop=office_supplies (177 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=office_supplies in favour of shop=stationery? For example, Staples, a large multinational stationery/office supplies shop is tagged 380 times as shop=stationery and 48 times as shop=office_supplies. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=stationery (8038 instances) and shop=office_supplies (177 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=office_supplies in favour of shop=stationery? For example, Staples, a large multinational stationery/office supplies shop is tagged 380 times as shop=stationery and 48 times as shop=office_supplies. Before I read the wiki, I thought office_supplies would be a better description to shops like Staples. However, wiki clearly says shop=stationery includes office supply stores such as Staples and Office Max/Depot. JOSM and iD have presets for shop=stationary. In iD there is no results for office supplies. Office points to Office Depot which will tag it as stationery. Based on history I agree that shop=office_supplies should be deprecated. Clifford -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
When I think of a stationery shop, I think of something like a FedEx Office minus the copiers and shipping. When I think of an office supply store, I think of something like Office Depot, Office Max or Staples, which also sell office furniture, computers, adding machines, filing cabinets, etc. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=stationery (8038 instances) and shop=office_supplies (177 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=office_supplies in favour of shop=stationery? For example, Staples, a large multinational stationery/office supplies shop is tagged 380 times as shop=stationery and 48 times as shop=office_supplies. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=mall versus shop=shopping_centre
At least in the USA, mall usually refers to a group of stores around a pedestrian-only courtyard, often with a common roof over both the stores and the courtyard space, and sharing a common parking lot. Shopping center usually refers to a linear or C-shaped group of stores, with a common parking area but no pedestrian courtyard. On October 20, 2014 7:00:43 PM CDT, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=mall (26 643 instances) and shop=shopping_centre (182 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=shopping_centre in favour of shop=mall? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] service= tag confusion
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 08:58:20AM -0500, Brad Neuhauser wrote: EDIT: looking into this further, service=tyres|dealer|parts|repair, which are the largest usage of the car repair-service tags (500-1800 uses, depending), all have wiki redirects to the Russian shop=car page ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU%3ATag%3Ashop%3Dcar). In looking at the service=tyres map on taginfo, the majority of usage is in Russia too http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/service=tyres#map Does anyone know someone who could bring this up on the Russian talk list? (or can read the Russian wiki page?) The wiki page says approx. shop=car is where cars are sold; shop=car+service=car_parts|... is where cars and also car parts|... are sold; see also shop=car_repair and shop=car_repair mentions service=tyres (as an undocumented usage). ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
I haven't noticed one for several years, but there used to be stores that specialized in selling greeting cards and small ornamental gifts. Hallmark greeting cards had a retail chain. On October 20, 2014 7:34:19 PM CDT, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: When I think of a stationery shop, I think of something like a FedEx Office minus the copiers and shipping. When I think of an office supply store, I think of something like Office Depot, Office Max or Staples, which also sell office furniture, computers, adding machines, filing cabinets, etc. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=stationery (8038 instances) and shop=office_supplies (177 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=office_supplies in favour of shop=stationery? For example, Staples, a large multinational stationery/office supplies shop is tagged 380 times as shop=stationery and 48 times as shop=office_supplies. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
I know I have used office_supply for Staples. When I looked it up in the wiki, the stationery page did not include the examples of the office superstores and my impression was that it was intended for smaller shops, including the Hallmark shops that John mentions. I considered Staples to be different enough to deserve a different tag. I am not convinced that I am right... just stating at how I arrived at my tagging decision. Toby On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:37 PM, John F. Eldredge j...@jfeldredge.com wrote: I haven't noticed one for several years, but there used to be stores that specialized in selling greeting cards and small ornamental gifts. Hallmark greeting cards had a retail chain. On October 20, 2014 7:34:19 PM CDT, Paul Johnson ba...@ursamundi.org wrote: When I think of a stationery shop, I think of something like a FedEx Office minus the copiers and shipping. When I think of an office supply store, I think of something like Office Depot, Office Max or Staples, which also sell office furniture, computers, adding machines, filing cabinets, etc. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=stationery (8038 instances) and shop=office_supplies (177 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=office_supplies in favour of shop=stationery? For example, Staples, a large multinational stationery/office supplies shop is tagged 380 times as shop=stationery and 48 times as shop=office_supplies. -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=stationery, shop=office_supplies
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 9:24 PM, Toby Murray toby.mur...@gmail.com wrote: I know I have used office_supply for Staples. When I looked it up in the wiki, the stationery page did not include the examples of the office superstores and my impression was that it was intended for smaller shops, including the Hallmark shops that John mentions. I considered Staples to be different enough to deserve a different tag. I am not convinced that I am right... just stating at how I arrived at my tagging decision. It looks like the wiki[1] was updated last December to add in the big box office supply stores. It does seem like a small card/stationery shop is a better match for shop=stationery. The big box stores like Staples would better fit to shop=office_supplies. But unless the editor presets are changed and someone changes existing tags, we should stick with the current definition. [1]An example of these in the USA would be Office Depot, Staples, and Office Max. -- @osm_seattle osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Pre-RFC: shop=mall versus shop=shopping_centre
I'm thinking this is a shopping mall http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/Eaton_Centre_HDR_style.jpg, and this is a shopping center http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Strip_Mall_Troy.jpg. Not to be confused with a mall http://i.imgur.com/MDVBYKF.jpg. On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl wrote: Dear all, We have currently two tags with a closely related, if not identical, meaning: shop=mall (26 643 instances) and shop=shopping_centre (182 instances). Is there a difference between these two tags, or should we deprecate shop=shopping_centre in favour of shop=mall? -- Matthijs ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
